The buzz concerning global temperature change and its subsequent effects has become a late 20th and early 21st century pandemic. From an economic standpoint, the worldwide temperature change obsession is lead with large "environmentally friendly" companies exploiting their audience through media and reaping the gains. Scientifically though, we all must wonder what is really happening to planet earth? Why is this "going green" phenomenon sweeping us off our feet, and is it there real truth to it?
As I started my university career I thought of global warming as a human byproduct due to the massive greenhouse gas pollution's (release of
CO2) created by motor vehicles and industrial sites. As I went
through my second and third year of Geology I discovered our contributing portion
of what everyone knows as "Global
Warming" is only a fraction of what is really happening within earth.
Yes global warming is simply the release of greenhouse gasses into the earth's
atmosphere creating large holes within the ozone layer - consequently allowing harmful rays
from the sun onto earth's crust resulting in the distortion of weather
patterns. The thing that bothers me is that media has publicized this
effect into their own market to entice people into buying products that are
"environmental friendly". The truth of "global warming" is
not complicated if one is open to suggestion and learning. In one of my
Geology classes we have learned the Earth goes through different
cycles every now and then
which consequentially affects worldwide temperature, factors such as water current
change, magnetic pole change, wind patterns change, ice eras fluctuating, and solar cycles among countless other aspects of the Earth's biosystem are all implicated in this phenomenon.
At face value, I do believe that in certain ways humans are contributing to global warming but in a very small amount compared to the other naturally occurring factors. For example, it is scientifically proven that the earth has been much warmer during past periods such as during the Eocene and Paleocene periods PETM (Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum) but also even more recently during the medieval times.
With this in mind, we know that the media is only trying to capture this "global warming" logo to increase profit at any cost. One of the main examples is Coca Cola with their polar bear aid program due to "global warming". A single 330 ml can of Coca Cola embodies the quantity of 170 g of Co2 and there are 475 billion servings of Coca Cola every year. Therefore the amount of Co2 produced by Coca Cola is extremely large and does not justify their cause. Further, where do you think these cans and bottles go? - They have to be recycled and processed which also consumes a tremendous amount of energy, resulting in large amounts of Co2 release into the atmosphere. An additional example is the "electric car" - another effective way of catching the consumer's eye via global warming. Car companies imply that this is the way to "save the planet" but in reality it takes a great amount of energy to charge an electric car whether it is from a electric station or from your home and the battery only lasts between 10 to 14 hours. The entire battery also has to be replaced within 5 years. Again this is not fixing the problem but simply just covering it with a "green" label to make profit.
Conclusively, the message I am portraying is that these companies are just trying to fool us with pretty images in order to gain profit but in reality they are one of the main contributors of Co2 worldwide. Again, their contributions towards temperature change is small compared to the natural cycles within outside earth but we have to understand that companies are only trying to come up with this global warming fiasco to obtain money from us.
Ask yourself, maybe what we know as "global warming" being caused by humans is only the by-product of companies wanting more from each one of us.
At face value, I do believe that in certain ways humans are contributing to global warming but in a very small amount compared to the other naturally occurring factors. For example, it is scientifically proven that the earth has been much warmer during past periods such as during the Eocene and Paleocene periods PETM (Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum) but also even more recently during the medieval times.
With this in mind, we know that the media is only trying to capture this "global warming" logo to increase profit at any cost. One of the main examples is Coca Cola with their polar bear aid program due to "global warming". A single 330 ml can of Coca Cola embodies the quantity of 170 g of Co2 and there are 475 billion servings of Coca Cola every year. Therefore the amount of Co2 produced by Coca Cola is extremely large and does not justify their cause. Further, where do you think these cans and bottles go? - They have to be recycled and processed which also consumes a tremendous amount of energy, resulting in large amounts of Co2 release into the atmosphere. An additional example is the "electric car" - another effective way of catching the consumer's eye via global warming. Car companies imply that this is the way to "save the planet" but in reality it takes a great amount of energy to charge an electric car whether it is from a electric station or from your home and the battery only lasts between 10 to 14 hours. The entire battery also has to be replaced within 5 years. Again this is not fixing the problem but simply just covering it with a "green" label to make profit.
Conclusively, the message I am portraying is that these companies are just trying to fool us with pretty images in order to gain profit but in reality they are one of the main contributors of Co2 worldwide. Again, their contributions towards temperature change is small compared to the natural cycles within outside earth but we have to understand that companies are only trying to come up with this global warming fiasco to obtain money from us.
Ask yourself, maybe what we know as "global warming" being caused by humans is only the by-product of companies wanting more from each one of us.
